RandomPoster
Platinum Member
- May 22, 2017
- 2,584
- 1,793
- 970
High School Students Disqualified From Debate After Quoting Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson
"Layton High School senior Michael Moreno and his debate partner, were participating in a round with a topic relating to immigration. The specific topic of the round was “Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially reduce restrictions on legal immigration.” Moreno and his partner were arguing in the negative, meaning they were arguing against the other team’s plan to reduce restrictions on legal immigration.
Instead of arguing in favor of cutting immigration as they were supposed to do, the other team read a slam poem about how terms like “legal” and “illegal” are dehumanizing.
Moreno and his partner responded by arguing the other team did not actually articulate a position. The structure of this debate allowed for the affirmative to propose a plan and then have the negative argue against that plan. Since the other team did not propose solutions to reduce restrictions on legal immigration, Moreno said, his team had nothing to argue against and claimed this was unfair.
The other team, during the cross-examination section of the debate, said Moreno and his partner could not talk about fairness because they were white males. Moreno then read quotes from Shapiro and Peterson pertaining to identity politics.
The judge then joined the opposing team, claiming Moreno and his partner had turned the debate into a discussion of “identity politics” and claimed Shapiro and Peterson are “racists.”
After another 10 minutes of this kind of back and forth, the judge said Moreno and his partner lost the round."
"Layton High School senior Michael Moreno and his debate partner, were participating in a round with a topic relating to immigration. The specific topic of the round was “Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially reduce restrictions on legal immigration.” Moreno and his partner were arguing in the negative, meaning they were arguing against the other team’s plan to reduce restrictions on legal immigration.
Instead of arguing in favor of cutting immigration as they were supposed to do, the other team read a slam poem about how terms like “legal” and “illegal” are dehumanizing.
Moreno and his partner responded by arguing the other team did not actually articulate a position. The structure of this debate allowed for the affirmative to propose a plan and then have the negative argue against that plan. Since the other team did not propose solutions to reduce restrictions on legal immigration, Moreno said, his team had nothing to argue against and claimed this was unfair.
The other team, during the cross-examination section of the debate, said Moreno and his partner could not talk about fairness because they were white males. Moreno then read quotes from Shapiro and Peterson pertaining to identity politics.
The judge then joined the opposing team, claiming Moreno and his partner had turned the debate into a discussion of “identity politics” and claimed Shapiro and Peterson are “racists.”
After another 10 minutes of this kind of back and forth, the judge said Moreno and his partner lost the round."
